Film and Radio Guide (Oct 1945-Jun 1946)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

30 FILM AND RADIO GUIDE Volume XII, No. 6 A PREVIEW OF LENTEN AND EASTER FILMS BY WILLIAM S. HOCKMAN Director of Religious Education, Lakewood, Ohio, Presbyterian Church Under the auspices of the Cleveland Church Federation, a preview of Lenten and Easter films was held on Jan. 21st, bringing together from greater Cleveland 175 interested clergy and laymen. The first film shown, Journey Into Faith (1), did not bring the audience to its feet. Many considered it a usuable film in the absence of better films. The photography was considered good and the sound track satisfactory. The story “did not jell.” The intention of the film was ambiguous, and its effect scattered. In places the acting was weak, and the representation of the character of Christ was considered by some as “very unsatisfactory” and by others as “acceptable.” The inclusion of so large an amount of apocryphal material was questioned. The group rated the film at C2 instead of Bl. An English-made film. The First Easter (2), was considered more satisfactory on all counts. The acting was stronger, and it was characterized by reverence, restraint, and feeling. The story stayed by the Biblical account, including little other material. The sound was clear, and the diction of the actors easily heard and understood. The incidental music was suited to the moods of the drama. The audience was impressed by the amount of Scripture in the dialog. The producer was not afraid of silence and pauses. The pace of the film varied. Rev. William S. Hockman A new release, Religion in the Family (3), elicited all kinds of responses from the audience. It was criticized severely for plugging a breakfast cereal and a well-known soft drink. “What’s it for?” asked several members of the group. Others remarked, “How could I use it?” Another, “It simply does not show religion in the home or how religion in the home carries over into life situations. It talks about religion; shows very little.” The sound track is technically good. The commentation is the backbone of the whole film. Without it, the picture sequences would have little meaning. There is no progression in the shot sequences. When it was characterized as “sermonic” and “preachy,” even the clergy present concurred. No better than a C3 rating could be given. The question of sufficient causation came up when the film, A Woman To Remember (4), was previewed and discussed. The widow of the story had such offhand and fleeting contact with The Master that her conversion seems less than real. To give this character to so young an actress was a mistake. A strong woman, with a face etched by strong lines which come from proud and willful living, is needed for the character to make it convincing. And, it was asked, “What is the picture driving at? What does the film set out to do?” About half the audience — as is generally the case — felt that the character of Christ was satisfactorily portrayed. Others felt that a more forceful picture could have been developed without His direct portrayal. Bl is about the best this previewing group would rate this film. Psalm of Psalms (5), was considered both “bad” and “good.” By “good” was meant better than having no pictoral representation and interpretation of the Twenty-Third Psalm at all. By “bad” was meant that it simply did not show that God is to human beings as is a shepherd to his flock. As a matter of plain fact, the pictorial content is just so much animal husbandry. The commentation in the soundtrack does reveal insights ; it contains some beautiful expressions of religious truth. Taken as a whole, the film does not get at the meaning of the